The fugitive slave laws were disliked by Northerners, but they were laws that must be followed as they were enacted under the Constitution. Document C provides an example of the problems the newly enforced laws created. Free African Americans had to constantly be aware of being kidnapped or mistaken for a runaway slave. Slave Hunters would often kidnap free blacks and claim they were runaway slaves, so they could make a profit of them. Although some people took advantage of the fugitive slave laws, there were groups of abolitionists who still fought to end slavery, despite what the Constitution upheld.
Leslie Chihuahua United States History to 1877 11/13/2015 11:00-11:50 AM Missouri Compromise was an agreement from the House of Representatives to reach a median to keep slavery out of Missouri after all the tribulations it had caused before it became a state. Henry Clay, Speaker of the House made important decisions in order for Missouri to be admitted as a state that could impact American history. In 1819, slavery was a resourceful profit to slave owners and this sparked a sectional controversy in the country over the efforts to expand slavery into the new western territories. The country had 22 states, eleven free eleven slave, and the line between them were distinguished by the northern and western boundaries of Pennsylvania and the Ohio River. (Txt.
Missouri Compromise (1820) Introduction This paper will explain and analyze the Missouri Compromise (1820). As the U.S. added territories, the issue of slavery resulted in political tension between the north and south. The southerners believed that slaves were needed to continue farming in the new lands and they attempted to introduce slave states in the west. On the other hand, the northerners argued that it was appropriate to prohibit and prevent the slavery institution from spreading westward. The north and south representatives in the House were also divided about the issue of abolition but were interested in the Union.
The Emancipation Proclamation needed a constitutional amendment to guarantee abolishment of all slavery in the United States since the Proclamation could not do that itself (Guelzo, 2005). In conclusion, Emancipation Proclamation did not free the slaves, but the slaves freed themselves. The Proclamation process was an essential step in the abolishment of the slavery in America, although it was not the reason why the slavery ended. The document motivated the enslaved individuals and freed African American people to join the Union, which eventually became a war for freedom. Determinations and preservation of the slaves across the country struck fear in the eyes of the Confederacy (Carnahan, 2007).
To further suppress black Americans, they would be arrested and imprisoned for the most trivial crimes or misdemeanours with very lengthy sentences, this was beneficial as the prison system in America was legalized slavery, due to the 13th Amendment. And hence the argument that their lives were not enriched, in spite of the acts and amendments put in
Dred Scott was taken back into slavery and accused Sandford because Scott was in a free states and claimed that he was in the free state long enough to be a free slave. The Supreme court ruled against Dred Scott, this decision affected blacks preventing them to become citizens and an giving them the right to appeal to a jury and making it harder for a slave to escape because the free states didn’t make a runaway slave a free slave. The case also affected popular sovereignty. Where states got to choose if they were to be a free states or a slave
They were above all of the other slave states, but they wanted to be able to still own slaves. When they were allowed to become a slave state, this put the North at a disadvantage of 15-16 representatives in elections. The Missouri Compromise allowed states that were below the 36-30 line to become slave states when they were admitted to become a state. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 repealed the 36-30 dividing line for slavery in the Louisiana Purchase area. Tensions rose between the North and South even more than they had in the Nullification
In the three decades leading up to the outbreak of the American Civil War in 1861, the abolitionist movement, through direct actions and sentiment against slavery, sowed radical reactionary responses across the southern slave states. While the actions and views of abolitionists did not reflect the widespread or majority opinion of the free states, the reciprocal effect of the abolitionist propaganda and violent actions led to greater polarization in America over the topic of slavery and its expansion. Additionally, the various actions performed by the northern based abolitionist created an aura of fear and paranoia amongst the ruling slaveholding political elite in the south who increasingly saw the actions as an attack on the southern slave
In the 19th century, slavery and the Reconstruction was a sore subject for the South. Reconstruction forged civil rights for African-Americans, but once the North’s influenced waned in the South, the South terrorized African-Americans and blocked them from accessing their newfound rights. While Reconstruction may have brought civil rights, those rights were quickly squashed by the South’s racism. Even after certain freedoms were securely gained, every new attempt to make African-Americans equal to the white populace was contested. A large group of people were happy to see slavery ended and civil rights rise.
With no final agreement, the country had no other choice but to go to war with itself. The slow decline of the, once powerful, Southern economy and the major issue of the abolishment of slaves are what led to the cause of the American Civil War. While economics and political structure played an important role in the cause of the Civil War, slavery was the main reason why altercations arose. Many historians and teachers try to hide the fact that slavery was such a huge factor in the cause of the Civil War because they looked at slavery as the “norm”. To them, the differences between the Republicans and Democratic formed great disagreement.